Johnny-come-latelies Unlikely To Break Hart In '88

January 5, 1986|By Douglas Pike of The Sentinel Staff

A slew of Democrats look at 1988 and long to play the old Gary Hart role. They want to be the fresh-faced spokesman for a party that no longer can afford its big-spender label. But there's one whopping problem with that daydream: In 1988 Hart still will have the image and the issues to play that part himself.

Nowadays every white Democrat has a spiel about how to pursue economic opportunity and other goals in new, non-bank-breaking ways. Of these artificial Harts in obscure states, Arizona Gov. Bruce Babbitt, 47, and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, 43, seem to be the media's favorites.

But Hart should put a natural, brutal question to all the folks who now following his footsteps. Where were you in the 1984 race when I stuck my neck out with a new-ideas platform? The answer: nowhere.

Take Babbitt, an articulate two-term governor of teeny Arizona. Sure, he's on the courageous, responsible edge of the deficit debate. He has called for limiting all kinds of federal aid to people with a financial need. But where was Babbitt on April 14, 1984, when Hart edged Mondale by 5 percent in the Arizona caucuses? Babbitt was neutral.

Take Biden, who won raves in 1984 for a stump speech that mixed liberalism, passion and humor. He likes to compare the southern part of his state to the American South, and argue that he would win the Southern states that are vital to victory. But where was Biden on March 14, 1984 when his home-state Democrats backed Walter Mondale, a sure loser in the South, over Hart by a 2- to-1 margin? Biden was neutral.

Logically, hopefuls for 1988 wanted Hart to twist slowly in the wind in 1984. They didn't want a successful Hart to block them later. So their best man was Mondale, with his defeat clearing the deck for someone new.

Lots of the Democrats now trying to revamp the party either tolerated or supported the nomination of Mondale, whose caricature as an interest-group megaphone led to a sweeping defeat. These would-be saviors hope that the average voter will have forgotten their 1984 role.

That wish may come true if the nation's columnists are any indication. They are ignoring this weakness of the little-known prospects, whom they're hyping via a Hope of the Month Club. Look for a special on Rep. Richard Gephardt of Missouri in June. Clearly, columnists have a built-in impulse against favorites. If the political fight looms smaller than Rocky vs. Ivan Drago, that crimps the fun, the flights and the insights.

So here come the rewrites from dogeared clippings about Hart. Like me in bars and Nancy Reagan in official bios, Hart has fibbed about his age. Big deal. His name used to be Hartpence. Big deal.

Indeed, for the pack of pundits, the survival instinct dictates a popular story line: that by 1988 poll-leader Hart will be stale stuff, easily bumpable by a telegenic challenger. One reason why this is nonsense: In 1984 Hart had a generation-gap edge over every opponent except the Rev. Jesse Jackson; his new opponents will have no such clear edge over the ''old-hat Hart,'' who is just 49.

But the force now with Hart is much more than his image. It stems from the fact that, contrary to Mondale's catchy ''Where's the beef?'' -- Hart was trying to put Democrats on a leaner diet in 1984 while other new-look Democrats were lounging on the sidelines.